11-05-2009 Planning Commission Minutes - Special Meeting

Home Browse Search

3. Move the pond further to the west. `.. 4. Make the entire road/lot into a separate lot as part of the subdivision process. This resolves the conflict brought to light by this application. The ordinance does not allow this level of development intensity. It would facilitate a compromise. The Planning Commission could approve the Variance for impervious coverage. The parking findings stated that the standards did not apply to this property, section or corridor. APPLICANT: Paul Tucci, Oppidan,Inc. Applicant requests a Variance to Exceed 25 Percent Impervious Surface Cover in the Commercial District. Mr. Marohn explained the Staff Report. Applicant was represented by Joe Ryan and Paul Tucci. Mr. Tucci gave a brief history of the project. The road to the south is a second access for safety and gets to a population base to the south. He disagrees that the road hinders properties along the highway. There are businesses there operating today. Those properties can be redeveloped if they can meet the standards. The road provides benefits to the City. Public comment: Curt Johnson, Denali Companies—He stated he can see the need for backage roads but would be careful to develop them for more than convenience. There will be a tremendous amount of truck traffic. Making sure the access roads meet the traffic that will be on the roads is critical. Kimberly Bolz-Andolshek, 27546 West Twin Lake Drive—Asked Mr. Marohn what prompted the second memo. Mr. Marohn stated the City typically receives applications 30 days in advance. This site plan came in Thursday at 11:00 a.m. and the Staff Report had to be out that day. After putting out the analysis he had discussions with the Chair and Vice-Chair regarding what could be done with the application that we could support or what would more closely meet the ordinance. If Staff would have had the 30 days they would have submitted a clearer document. Mrs. Bolz-Andolshek further questioned the private conversation indicated in the memo and wondered if they were with the Planning Commission. Mr. Marohn stated the private conversation was with the developer. Mrs. Bolz-Andolshek also questioned the second memo,number 6 with regard to the developer offering to pay the cost differences to the City. Is this typical? She had called other cities and it is atypical. As an outsider looking in this is very interesting. If Mr. Marohn feels this is going to pass tonight, she is wondering how there could possibly be a consensus before a meeting. She is concerned this is a done deal. It is not uncommon to table things. Now the City needs to fix something that is in our Ordinance. It is frustrating that the onus is on the City. If we are going to start looking at Ordinances it Minutes 2 Pequot Lakes Planning Commission Special Meeting November 5,2009